ArticleInternational journal of laboratory hematology2026
Clinical Evaluation of a Novel Point-of-Care Hematology Analyzer for Complete Blood Count With Differential.
Article in International journal of laboratory hematology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hemoscreen Point-of-Care Analyzer Compared With Sysmex XN-1000 for Complete Blood Count in Pediatric Inpatients Aged 2 Months to 17 Years.International journal of laboratory hematology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPoint-of-care testing (POCT) for hematology enables clinicians to access actionable results during patient visits, supporting timely decisions such as transfusions or chemotherapy adjustments. However, POCT analyzers must demonstrate clinical performance comparable to centralized laboratory systems. We conducted a proof-of-concept evaluation of the HemoScreen (PixCell Medical, Israel) hematology POCT analyzer across diverse clinical settings in an integrated healthcare system.
methodsEDTA whole blood specimens from inpatient wards, emergency departments, outpatient clinics, and infusion centers underwent routine CBC testing on a Sysmex XN analyzer (Sysmex Corporation, Japan) at the central laboratory. Residual, de-identified samples were tested within 10 min on a HemoScreen analyzer. All parameters and instrument flags were recorded.
resultsFrom 9/15/2020 to 11/20/2020, 199 samples were analyzed, including 49 from the emergency department and 50 each from inpatient, outpatient, and infusion center settings. HGB, RBC, PLT, WBC, and absolute neutrophil count showed strong linear correlations (R
conclusionHemoScreen demonstrated generally acceptable agreement with the Sysmex XN for most parameters. However, systematic differences in HCT, MCV, neutrophil, and monocyte results warrant further investigation to assess clinical impact before broader implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.